[council] Regarding term limits - GNSO review

[Ken Stubbs]

Philip and fellow council members

In response to your comments Philip, I specifically recall the gentleman
from the London School of Economics indicating in one of the briefings I
attended that Council
Term Limits was one area where he felt that beneficial action could be
taken immediately & independently of other suggested changes.

I do firmly believe in the majority of the other LSE recommendations
and I personally have taken my own first step in recognizing that there
needs to be some "fresh blood" & different perspectives on the council
and have decided not to seek re-election to the council (my term ends
with the Sao Paulo meeting)

The 7+ years I have spent on the council (as both a member and Council Chair
for 2 terms) have been challenging,  interesting, and most of the time,
very rewarding & satisfying.
I have seen over the last 12-18 months a disturbing trend (a heavy
strain in the structure)  which makes it very difficult for all of us to
be as effective as we need to be as a deliberative & consultive body.

I am personally very concerned about the next steps in this LSE process.
In addition to fresh perspectives on the council, there needs to be
outside participation in this transition as the current council is just
"too comfortably in-place" and many members will be reluctant to make
some of these much needed changes. Some may very well have gotten "too
embedded" in these positions & will find just about any way to avoid
having to give it up. The analogy I made in our LSE Q&A session was one
of letting an alcoholic prescribe their own course of treatment.

We need to acknowledge this reality, then we will end right back up in
12-18 months with the same problems & dis functionality.

I suspect that many in the ICANN community see the need for injection of
new perspectives, personalities & enthusiasm into this body. I I hope
that my actions will start the ball rolling in a positive way.

My very best wishes to you all,


Ken



Philip Sheppard wrote:
> I disagree with this.
> I thought we had had an earlier discussion about the need to avoid taking piecemeal
> recommendations from one or other GNSO review?
> We need to consider changes holistically and within the context outlined at the last Council
> meeting.
> Philip
> 
> PS Constituencies already have internal rules - that is bottom-up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>